PROFESSIONAL PRACTICES ON RESEARCH SUPERVISION FOR THAI PUBLIC HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS

(1)

http://mojem.um.edu.my 51

[1]

Department of Educational Administration, Faculty of Education, Khon Kaen University, THAILAND

[2]

Department of Educational Measurement and Evaluation, Faculty of Education, Khon Kaen University,

THAILAND

[3]

Department of Educational Research and Evaluation, Faculty of Education, Rajabhat Maha Sarakham University, THAILAND

Corresponding Author:

Khon Kaen University, THAILAND

Email: kanoklin@kku.ac.th.

ABSTRACT

Conducting research is a major principle of postgraduate study in tertiary education. The purpose of this research was to investigate the professional practice on research supervision for Thai university staff. The objectives of this study were to develop professional practice indicators on research supervision by Critical Participatory Action Research and to study the results of professional practice on research supervision. This is followed by using Critical Participatory Action Research (CPAR) namely saying, doing and relating through the communicative action, communicative space, invitational education, collaborative action and public spheres. Finally researchers study the results of professional practice on research supervision. This study comprised four phases namely preparation phase, collaboration phase, action phase and relating phase. Preparation phase covered the goal setting and building the communication space. Collaboration phase refers to developing the indicators of working by searching for co-factors in working as well as model for new faculty staff in research supervision, effective working technique, and mechanism for monitoring. Action phase was to put the model and determination into practice, sharing, reflection, and evaluating the problems and obstacles during the action. Relating phase was to share and exchange the occurred innovation in each university, documents, best practice, and creation of new body of knowledge. Research results revealed that the communicative space should be provided in order to develop participatory working among the researchers. Four indicators of professional practice on research supervision were developed by the participants, namely the depth of content knowledge, competency for mentoring, creative leadership, and work performance. The findings show that professional development programs for university staff consisted of content or body of knowledge, approach for providing advice, and mechanism of mentoring. The best practice guidelines and by product in working as research supervisor were obtained

in order to be applied for more effective role as research supervisor or mentor.

Keywords: Professional Practice, Research Supervision, Critical Participatory Action Research, Higher Education, Thailand

APRIL 2015, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 2, 51 - 69 E-ISSN NO: 2289 – 4489

PROFESSIONAL PRACTICES ON RESEARCH SUPERVISION FOR THAI PUBLIC HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS

Kanokorn Somprach1_{, Nuchwana Luanganggoon}2_{& Pongtorn Popoonsak}3 (PhD)

(2)

http://mojem.um.edu.my 52 INTRODUCTION

The concept in teaching and learning for postgraduate study, aimed at producing human beings competent in learning as well as searching for new knowledge emphasizing on knowledge searching by conducting research. The learning process comprised both psychological process and social process. It was science as well as the process that lead to critical theory from the past until the present. Human beings’ learning referred to ones’ knowledge and knowledge searching including three viewpoints under the belief that learning would occur from one’s interest in the topic which could be classified into 3 models. There are technical interests, practical interests, and emancipatory interests. This emancipator interest is an alternative between the truth and power as the freedom approach, and the origin of critical theory in the present (Habermas, 1972).

Critical Participatory Research aims at changing the three important perspectives (Kemmis, McTaggart & Nixon, 2014) namely practitioners’ practice, their understandings of their practice, and the conditions in which they practice. So we can claim that Critical Participatory Action Research is a process of practice-changing practice.

Critical thinking can be defined as one’s analytical thinking, critiquing, considering, collecting data as well as problems before making decision to believe or act in order to have careful, logical, and reasonable thought through one’s consideration, selection, thinking over both of benefit as well as harm and real value of that particular issue. In order to develop the critical thinking process, every level could be developed, and should be performed by encouraging the persons to administer their own existing competency to increase capability in thinking efficiently by using the adequate stimulus as well as effective method.

The body of knowledge in Social Science was not caused by one’s observable conscious or taking for granted. The theory or body of knowledge had to be analyzed and critiqued according to the time in order to be the body of knowledge so that it is useful for the community and society in future.

(3)

Furthermore, thesis advisors are required to obtain intensive understanding in the research area, particularly to those students under their supervision. They have to be not only diligent but also hard working advisors. Since they should be ‘intelligent’ and ‘good’, ‘being intelligent’ was caused by the major factors like their personal knowledge and intelligence. For example ‘being good’ is one of the more complex factors. If this issue was related to Buddha’s Dharma Principles or Teaching which should be so called “The Four Principles of Virtuous Existence”. ‘The Four Principles of Virtuous Existence’ consisted of Mercy, Kindness, Rejoicing and Indifference. The Mercy referred to love and to be tender toward others. Kindness referred to one’s compassion to help other persons be free from suffering. The Rejoicing refers to celebrating with others in their good fortune and indifference means neutrality in affairs of the world, referring to impartiality and indifference.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Patanothai (2005) concluded that a thesis advisor plays various roles by inclusively acting as consultant, supporter, mentor, super-ordinate, patron, as well as role model for students to imitate. Besides, Patanothai further concluded that the research topics should be conducted within our national problems. On top of that, thesis advisors have to ensure that the research findings are able to be published in international journals. Therefore the problems have to be written as universal problems or generic or at least should be regional problems in order to attract interest of international readers. In postgraduate study at tertiary education level, if one wanted to create the valuable research study and produce quality research findings, a mentor system or a kind of mechanism between the mentors and new graduated postgraduate students from Higher Education Institutions in Thailand is therefore a necessity.

Puworrawan (2005) had summarized seven principles of a good thesis advisor as follows: (1) being merciful and friendly; (2) being respectable and appropriate conduct; (3) being intelligent and having real knowledge; (4) being able to make the others’ understanding by speaking, know what should be spoken, and when it should be spoken; (5) being patient, not being bored with, and listening to other persons; (6) speaking the difficult thing to be simple or easy to be understood, and (7) did not want any temptation or money, and transferring all of one’s knowledge.

(4)

of Valuable Tools which enable one to Reach the Goal including: (1) Chitta-attending wholeheartedly to the things concerned without letting go of it; (2) Chanta-Satisfaction and joy in things concerned; (3) Wiriya-Diligent effort in doing the things concerned, and (4) Wimungsa-diligently thinking.

It was congruent with the teachers’ mind as to be the researcher mentors based on Asian’s Philosophy as follows: (1) being tutors, (2) being advisors, (3) being coaches, (4) being supervisors, (5) being role models, (6) being counselors and supporters, and (7) being professional consultants.

In addition, Dustin (2014) has summarized the following steps to be taken by students to produce a good research paper. The first step is to write the working schedule for thesis advisor; the second step is to start by searching for different keywords of research study. This is followed by the third step to collect the bibliographies. Then, keeping the research questions in one’s mind throughout the time as well as answering the research problem. The next step is to be persistent in managing each piece of work to be finished without leaving it too long. The sixth step is to organize the complete data system. Next, is to know what to be drawn from which repository, for instance, the online, library, and so forth. The eighth step is to ask for help when necessary by requesting support from data source as human (university staff) or students. The ninth step is to employ note taking throughout the time, when one could think or find about something it should be taken note immediately or when one could remember something it should be written to prevent forgetfulness. Then, it would be organized in one’s notebook, and finally is being modern and current.

Critical Participatory Action Research: CPAR was the research principle using for changing the practice guidelines of society, viewpoints, practice, interactions with the others in order to make changes by stepping over the occurrences such as unpractical, unsustainable, and injustice ones. According to these reasons, the researchers applied principles of CPAR in this study to search for the model of professional practice on research supervision.

Carr and Kemmis (1986) distinguished three kinds of action research based on Habermas’s (1972, 1974) theory of knowledge-constitutive interests:1) technical action research guided by an interest in improving control over outcomes; 2) practical action research guided by an interest in educating or enlightening practitioners so they can act more wisely and prudently, and 3) critical action research guided by an interest in emancipating people and group from irrationality, unsustainability, and injustice.

(5)

reason and fully rational knowledge in the face of ideologically frozen representation of social, political, economic and scientific “reality”. The emancipatory interest is the one that drive us toward the detection and elimination of false beliefs in areas concerned with technical and practical interest.

Action research is aimed at changing practices, people’s understandings of their practices, and conditions under which they practice. This is a form of the definition of action research that Stephen Kemmis and Robin McTaggart framed in earliest version of The Action Research Planner (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1988).

Part of the logic came from Habermas’s (1972) theory of knowledge-constitutive interests in which he identified three principal media in which social life is structured: language, work and power. There were the underpinnings of their practices, as expressed in language, (b) the activities people engage in as part of their practices, as expressed in work, and (c) people’s situation and the conditions under which they practice as expressed in relationships of power.

The concepts of “communicative action”, “communicative space”, and the “public sphere” outlined by German social theorist Habermas (1987, 1996) and described in Kemmis and McTaggart (2000, 2005) helped to define a new generation of critical participatory action research and the conditions to support it. They also described communication action as what happens when people interrupt what they are doing to ask “What is happening here?” People frequently ask this question when they feel that something is not quite right about what is going on, impractical or malpractice.

A “practice” is a socially established cooperative human activity in which characteristic arrangement of action and activities (doings) are comprehensible in term of arrangement of relevant ideas in characteristic discourses (saying), and when the people and objects involved are distributed in characteristic arrangements of relationships (relating), and when this complex of sayings, doings and relating ‘hang together’ in a distinctive human social project (Kemmis et al., 2014).

The invitational education foundations and assumptions should enable an educator to operate from an inviting stance, a focused framework for sustained action. This framework enables an educator both to dig in and to branch out in the extension of messages that call forth human potential (Novak, 2009). The five assumptions are respect, trust, care, optimism, and intentionality.

(6)

http://mojem.um.edu.my 56 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

The main objective of this study was to explore the indicators of professional practice on research supervision of university staff. This is followed by developing the professional practice by using Critical Participating Action Research namely saying doing and relating through the communicative action, communicative space, public spheres, and collaborative action. Finally the researchers study the results of professional practice on research supervision. The specific objectives of the study are:

(1) To explore how indicators of Professional Practice on research supervision for Thai higher education institutes could be developed.

(2) To develop Professional Practice on research supervision by CPAR. (3) To study the results of Professional Practice on research supervision

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

The following conceptual framework was drawn from; concept of Critical Participatory Action Research and supporting factors, concept of concerned factors on the practice of supervision, and concept of process and the art of mentoring. Critical Participatory Action Research (CPAR) was the research principle using for changing the practice guidelines of society, viewpoints, practice, interactions with the others in order to make changes by stepping over the occurrences such as unpractical, unsustainable, and injustice ones. (Kemmis, McTaggart, & Nixon, 2014; Habermas, 1974, 1987). Moreover, the support factors of CPAR were invitational education, self-refection, communicative action, and collaborative action (Carr & Kemmis, 1986; Novak, 2009; Southworth, 2009).

The concerned factors on the practice of supervision was reviewed in changing practice, changing education (Kemmis, Wilkinson, Edward-Groves, & Hady, 2014) and The Action Research Planner: Doing Critical Participatory Action Research (Kemmis et al., 2014).

(7)

http://mojem.um.edu.my 57 Concern

Inconsistency in theory and practice

Injustice Professional Practice on Research Processes Mechanism

Content and Knowledge for program training

Approach and Process Pattern Monitoring

Self-reflection Saying

 Inviting strategies

 Dialogue / deep listening

 Discourse

 Set criteria and indicators

Doing  Action

 Observing

 Reflecting and re-planning Relating

 Discuss and construct the knowledge

 Good practice

 Innovation exchange

 Document

 Standard

Communicative action Invitational education

Collaborative action

(8)

http://mojem.um.edu.my 58 METHOD

Research Design

Critical Participatory Action Research (CPAR) was the method utilized in this study. The researchers adapted the CPAR which was recommended by Kemmis et al. (2014). This research involved four phases. The first phase was Preparation or goal setting and providing communicative space for researchers then followed by using CPAR; saying, doing, and relating through the communicative action, communication space, invitational education, collaborative action and public spheres. Collaboration phase is the second phase (saying) that was to collaborate in searching for the common factors of participatory work. The Professional Development Program for new instructors and common factor of research supervision in postgraduate study, working technique, and mechanism for monitoring the research studies were developed. Phase 3, Action Phase (doing), was the practice of findings as well as common factor for sharing and reflection. Phase 4, Relating Phase, was to participate in concluding, innovation and document sharing, and new body of knowledge building.

In the preparation phase, the goals were set. In addition, the atmosphere of participatory working was constructed by building the communicative space, stating the major issues of concern. A total of 28 persons were involved in the discussion; they were the researcher, co-researchers, and 26 participants. Group discussion was performed thrice for time schedule, common area and relation were constructed for reflection and working. After three sessions of public spheres, researchers were able to determine three indicators of participatory working, namely Professional Development program for new staff, co-factors, guidelines, approaches or process for research supervision, and mechanism for monitoring research supervision.

Table 1

Time Schedule

Date Place Topic

June 2, 2014 Faculty of Education KhonKaen University

Building the communicative space and the concern of Professional Supervision

June 23, 2014 Faculty of Education

RajabhatMahaSarakham University

Professional practice for supervisor

July 14, 2014 Faculty of Education KhonKaen University

(9)

The purpose of collaboration phase was to collaborate in searching for common things in working. The model for new staff or instructors was identified including providing advice for research studies in professional development program, effective working technique, and mechanism for monitoring. Next is the action phase. In this phase the common findings as well as determination were practiced in one’s own workplace. Then, the sharing and reflection were performed. In addition, the occurred problems and obstacles in action were evaluated.

The final phase is relating phase. In this phase, sharing and learning occurred. The occurred innovation in each university, and documents were shared and exchanged. Furthermore, the new body of knowledge was constructed. Figure 2 shows the workflow of the research.

Population and Sample

A total of 26 participants were selected from 13 public universities located in the North and the Northeast of Thailand. In other words, each university would be represented by two staff members. The 13 public universities involved in this study were: Mae Fha Luang University, Naresuan University, Maha Sarahkam University, Khon Kaen University, Rajabhat Sakonnakorn University, Rajabhat Maha Sarakham University, Rajabhat Kalasin University, Rajabhat Nakorn Ratchasima University, Rajabhat Udorn Thani University, Rajabhat Roi-Et University, Rajabhat Chaiyaphum University, Rajabhat Ubon Ratchathani University, and Rajabhat Burirum University.

Instrument

Documentary Study was used to find out the guideline or the forms that each institution generally used in research advisory work.

Semi-structured Interview was used to collect data. The questions were about the practices of being a research supervisor. It was done by both face-to-face technique and using telecommunication. Moreover, group discussion was carried out three times among 28 persons in Khon Kaen University. These three discussions were held to find out the indicators of being a good research supervisor.

Group Discussion for 22 participants.

(10)

http://mojem.um.edu.my 60 Data Collection

This research was carried out during June to November 2014. The duration of first phase was about one month that is during June 2014. The questionnaires were distributed to 28 lecturers. This was followed by the second phase from July to September 2014; the research participants discussed and tried out their practices of being research supervisors. Then, the final phase took about two months, during October and November 2014.

Data Analysis

The data from documentary study, dialogue were analyzed by content analysis.

The transcribed interview data were analyzed by using descriptive, interpretive and critical analysis techniques.

The data from group discussion were also grouped according to the theory of professional educators. There were four domains as follow:

Characteristics: The depth of content knowledge

Competency: The competency for mentoring

Academic leadership: The creative leadership

Work performance: The work performance

(11)

Saying

Relating Doing

(Practics) - knowledge building

- document sharing - innovation exchanging

Contents and Body of Knowledge

Technique/ approach

Mechanism for following up the students.

PD Program

The program model was obtained.

Supervise for co-factor of working. Technique, and working guideline. Problem solving technique was obtained.

How to monitor?

Figure 2. Workflow of the research

(12)

Research supervision could be classified into 3 major principles, namely:

 Contents and knowledge, for instance, what kinds of knowledge and competencies the thesis advisors should have.

 Approach, the guidelines for working techniques as well as supervising technique for students.

 Mechanism for following up with the students, for instance, how to monitor them

FINDINGS

In order to achieve the major objective of this study namely to identify the indicators of professional practice on research supervision, several research methods had been utilized such as documentary analysis, questionnaire and group discussion. The findings presented would mainly focus on the explored indicators of professional practice on research supervision for Thai Higher Education Institutes.

The Explored Indicators of Professional Practice on research supervision

The indicators of professional practice on research supervision had been developed by the participants. These explored components are (1) the depth of content knowledge, (2) the competency for mentoring, (3) the creative leadership, and (4) the performance.

The Development of Professional Practice by CPAR

Results from this study are intended to provide clear and succinct guidelines for professional practice on research supervision. This is an area of critical importance to universities. Undertaking research is an essential component of graduate study. A good supervisory relationship creates a healthy and supportive environment for students to accomplish their research and scholarly goals. It also creates a positive and productive environment for faculty supervisors. According to the discussion group findings, many of them viewed the research done by their graduate students as not only contributing to their personal research programs, but frequently as an indispensable component.

(13)

http://mojem.um.edu.my 63 Contents and Body of Knowledge

Supervisors are expected to provide guidance for students in developing their thesis/project topics. This includes offering ideas and mostly assisting students in identifying areas suitable for investigation within a discipline. In instances where a student enters the relationship with a well-developed idea for a research study, the supervisor can assist in refining the research focus and delimiting the study.

Every thesis-based research project begins with the development of a formal research proposal by the student. While the length and substance will vary among departments and schools, a proposal serves as a basis for developing a research project that will meet academic standards. Once the supervisor feels the study is ready for launching, he or she will sign a proposal acceptance form and file it. Departments and schools may require a proposal committee meeting in order to provide feedback on the proposal. In short, the contents and body of knowledge will cover the aspects as in the following:

 Methodology - qualitative - quantitative

- mixed method research - etc.

 The design for variable measurement

 Data Analysis and Program for analyzing the data. For example M-Plus, AMOS etc.

 Writing Format of 5 Chapters (format of each institute)

 3 Exemplary Case Studies for good practice

 Evaluation/Testing the trainees or practitioners

The Approach for Providing Advice

Signing a formal research proposal does not preclude the possibility that research studies can change due to unforeseen circumstances, creating a situation where the purpose of the study as originally stated is not achievable. Where this happens, changes must be jointly agreed upon by both supervisor and student, and must adhere to departmental or school policy. Substantial changes in focus may require the submission of a new proposal. Generally the approach for providing advice should include the 5 steps as follows:

 The selection of research topics

The strategy for selecting the problem/topic depended on:

(14)

http://mojem.um.edu.my 64 - Background of the problem or topic

- The students’ ability

 The technique for obtaining data and information

 Writing Technique

 The research instrument and blueprint construction

 The discussion and recommendations writing

The Mechanism of Monitoring

Faculty members who have agreed to supervise graduate students are expected to be reasonably accessible for thesis consultation, occasionally on short notice. To whatever extent possible, supervisor should plan with students around likely completion dates in order to avoid interruptions and delays. In cases of leaves of absence or sabbaticals, the supervisor, in consultation with the graduate coordinator, may arrange for a replacement supervisor.

It is the faculty supervisor’s responsibility to assist a graduate student in designing a study that is achievable in a reasonable time. A central component of the research process for graduate students is constructive and timely feedback from supervisors. This is crucial in allowing a student to maintain consistent progress. What constitutes timely feedback is to be negotiated in each supervisory relationship, and perhaps by standard established within departments and schools. Under normal circumstances, students should not expect feedback to be “immediate”, but neither should they expect it to exceed two weeks.

Constructive and timely feedback is equally crucial in cases where students are not meeting academic expectations. While these discussions can be difficult, it serves no one’s interest to prolong a study if success is unlikely. Supervisors are expected to support students’ professional gatherings, for example participate in conferences or symposia. Where appropriate, supervisors should encourage the publication jointly or otherwise of a student’s work.

The supervisor is responsible for advising the students as to the quality of the thesis. In other words it meets or exceeds the standards of graduate level work at Thai universities and to judge whether it is ready for submission. In brief, the mechanism of monitoring should be employed by the supervisor through their commitment. The mentioned commitment should be developed such as communication or monitoring technique, time scheduling, evaluation of each work, and so forth.

 The school report

 Planning and scheduling the journal to be published.

(15)

Findings indicate that from being research supervisors, the potential effects would be

 Knowledge

 Thought

 Friends, Academic and Professional Networks

 Happiness

In addition, it was found that the state of thesis advisors included association as lifelong relationship. The additional techniques for supervising the research were as follows:

 Being friendly.

 Sharing

 Freedom to present one’s own opinion to the advisee.

 Systematic research monitoring.

 Creative consultation, holding the conference for planning the research project work.

After three months of implementation, the 22 research participants used the Multi-Attribute Consensus Reaching (MACR) Technique and responded to the four components questionnaire. The results are shown in the following table.

Table 2

The Results of Professional Practices on Research Supervision (N = 22)

Professional Practice

The depth of content knowledge/Literacy % n

1. Theoretical content 86.36 19

2. Research methodology 81.82 18

3. Research design – mixed method research 68.18 15

4. Research comprehension 50.00 11

5. ICT literacy 36.36 8

6. Data analysis: advanced statistics, software for data procession, qualitative data analysis.

27.27 6

The competencies for mentoring

7. Mentor & coaching activities 95.45 21

8. Learning person 90.91 20

9. Ethics & Code of conduct 68.18 15

(16)

11. Resourcefulness 36.36 8

The creative leadership

12. Global research trend 90.91 20

13. Current issue / hot issue 90.91 20

14. Innovation / model 77.27 17

15. Cross-cultural research 45.45 10

The work performance

16. International publication 90.90 20

17. Publication in Science direct or Scopus 90.90 20

18. National publication (TCI) 68.18 15

19. Local journal in Thailand 9.09 2

Findings of the quantitative phase show that:

The quantitative results of professional practices on research supervision on the aspect depth of content knowledge/literacy show that most respondents focus on the theoretical content (86.36%) and research methodology (81.82%) respectively. On the other hand, the respondents were least concerned (27.27%) with the aspect of data analysis such as advanced statistics, software for data procession, and qualitative data analysis.

For the competencies of mentoring, the most important competency for mentoring were mentor and coaching activities (95.45%) whereas the learning person competency was the second (90.91%) highest listed. Finally, the resourceful supervisor was the least important (36.36%) aspect to take into consideration.

In addition, related to the creative leadership, global research trend and current issue/ hot issue were equally given priority (90.91%). However, findings show that the least important item was cross-cultural research (45.45%).

(17)

http://mojem.um.edu.my 67 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

According to the first research objective, it was found that the four components namely depth of content knowledge and literacy, the competencies for mentoring, the creative leadership, and the work performance were partly relevant to the indicators of Research University in Thailand and the professional teacher indicators of Basic Education Commission in Thailand which comprised content knowledge, competency and academic leadership. Moreover, the performance component was also relevant to the indicator of educational quality of Thailand Quality Award (TQA).

Being a research supervisor one needs to develop these recommended professional practice skills in contents and body of knowledge, the approach for providing advice including the 5 steps, and the mechanism of monitoring. This is particularly needed by the naïve supervisors. However, the other research supervisors should also be persistent academicians in learning.

Results of the study revealed that some indicators of professional practice on research supervision were at rather low level. The data analysis (software for data processing) ability was very low because of inadequate training, including the information and communications technology (ICT) literacy. As the graduate students usually expected to have resourceful supervisors, they would like to gain more comprehensive and substantial advice. Hence, the higher education institutes should encourage the supervisors and graduate students to practice lifelong learning.

To become an ASEAN community, the findings of the study indicated that Professional Development Program should encompass those studies that employ cross-cultural research design and comparative (study) research design. In order to assess the work performance of Thai Higher Education supervisors, universities need to rely on the Educational Quality to be Excellent. The score count for the publication sources were significant for quality assurance. When researchers compared among the four publication sources, the result of the study revealed the less interesting source for the graduate student’s publication including supervisor’s publication source was the local journal in Thailand.

(18)

The professional practice in other issues should be studied using Critical Participatory Action Research and appropriate time should be given especially in duration of sharing as well as reflection in order to obtain the best outcome. Research participants should adjust their techniques for collecting data obtained from their practice to be objective and employ various methods. For instance, journal writing for collecting data from doctoral students or recording or note taking are equally important.

The ethics issues should be considered while being a mentor or coach; otherwise the research supervisor might dominate the idea of their students; this may inhibit the creativity of the students or researchers.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, this study found that there are four developed indicators of professional practice on research supervision. The identified indicators consisted of the depth of content knowledge/ literacy, the mentoring competencies, creative leadership, and the work performance. According to responses from the 26 participants in this study, we can conclude that the professional development program for practitioners should consist of contents and body of knowledge, the approach for providing advice, and the mechanism for monitoring. Moreover, guidelines should be prepared for the practitioners and the criteria for performance assessment should be developed for further study.

REFERENCES

Blasé, J., & Blasé, J. (1998). Handbook of instructional leadership: How really good principals promote teaching and learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Boonsang, W. (2005). Mentoring. Bangkok, Thailand: National Science and Technology Development Institute.

Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge and action research. London, UK: Falmer.

Dustin,W. (2014). Advice for Students: 10 Steps Toward Better Research. Retrieved from http:// www.lifeehack.org/articles/communication/advice-for-students-10-steps-toward-better

research.html

(19)

Habermas, J. (1974). Theory and practice (trans. J. Viertel). London, UK: Heinemann.

Habermas, J. (1987). Theory of communicative action, volume II: Lifeworld and system: A critique of functionalist reason (trans. Thomas McCarthy). Boston, MA: Beacon.

Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms (trans. William Rehg). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research planner. Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.

Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2000). Participatory action research. In N. Denzin& Y. Lincoln (Eds.),

Handbook of qualitative research (2nd Ed., pp. 567-605). Thousand Oaks CA : Sage.

Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2005). Participatory action research: Communicative action and the public sphere. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook ofqualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 559- 604). Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage.

Kemmis, S., Wilkinson J., Edwards-Groves, C., Hardy, I., Grootenboer, P., & Bristol, L. (2014).

Changing practices, changing education. Singapore: Springer.

Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2014). The Action Research Planner: Doing Critical Participatory Action Research. Singapore: Springer.

Novak, J. M. (2009). Invitational leadership. In (Ed.) B. Davies(Ed.), The essentials of school leadership. London, UK: Sage.

Patanothai, A.(2005). Mentor, mentee and mentoring. Bangkok, Thailand: National Science and Technology Development Institute.

Puworrawan, Y. (2005). The art of mentoring. Bangkok, Thailand: National Science and Technology Development Institute.

Southworth, G. (2009). Learning-centered leadership. In B. Davies (Ed.), The essentials of school leadership. London, UK: Sage.